Turning the Tide: Improving Water Resource Management in the ...

Policy Brief SENATE ECONOMIC PLANNING OFFICE PB-11-03

August 2011

Water is arguably the most important natural resource and because it is scarce, its optimal usage and proper management must be ensured. Water governance in the Philippines, however, has become too complex with so many institutions involved, all with different hierarchical coverage, varied mandates and representing the interests of diverse constituencies. It is thus worthwhile to look at the proposed reform measures to improve the country’s regulatory and institutional frameworks for sustainable water resource management.

Turning the Tide: Improving Water Resource Management in the Philippines Introduction Water is a basic human need, and access to it is regarded as a fundamental human right. For centuries, human progress and development has been dependent upon the ability of communities to access clean water and harness its potential as a productive resource. Many early Philippine societies were established along the country’s extensive coastline and along the banks of great rivers such as Cagayan River, Rio Grande de Mindanao, and Pasig River. The role of water as a tool for progress and development has become increasingly important through the centuries. According to the 2006 United Nations Human Development Report (HDR), “water for life in the household and water for livelihoods through production are two of the foundations for human development.” Unfortunately, water scarcity is already a serious problem in many developing countries across the globe. In the Philippines, 2010 data from the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) revealed that 16 percent of all households remain without access to clean and potable water. This situation is expected to worsen in the near future given the rising population that results in an increasing demand for the country’s already dwindling water supply. The dwindling water supply was brought about by decades of resource mismanagement, inadequate investments in physical infrastructure, and the growing threat of climate change. A study by the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and National Water Resources Board (NWRB) estimated that all major cities in the Philippines will experience water shortages by 2025 (Table 1). The Philippine national government has sole ownership and control over the country’s water resources, as provided by the 1987 Constitution. Section 2, Article XII of the Constitution states that “all lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State.” In addition, “the exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State.”

The SEPO Policy Brief, a publication of the Senate Economic Planning Office, provides analysis and discussion on important socioeconomic issues as inputs to the work of Senators and Senate Officials. The SEPO Policy Brief is also available at www.senate.gov.ph.

However, the poor state of the country’s water resources reflects the national government’s inability to prevent resource degradation and ensure the provision of safe and adequate water supplies for the human population. Studies have attributed the government’s poor performance 1

to weak regulatory institutions and the absence of a clear and organized framework for water resource governance. The purpose of this paper therefore is to propose policy measures that seek to address these issues and provide the impetus for sustainable water resource management in the country. Table 1: Supply and Projected Demand of Groundwater in Major Metropolitan Areas in the Philippines Area

Metro Manila Metro Cebu Davao City Baguio City Angeles City Bacolod City Iloilo City Cagayan de Oro City Zamboanga City

Exploitable Groundwater (1998) MCM* 191 60 84 15 137 103 80 34 54

Projected Water Demand (2025) MCM* 2883 342 153 87 31 111 47 98 203

has also extensive groundwater reserves that contribute 13.8 percent to the country’s total water resource potential.1 All in all, it has been estimated that annual water use in the Philippines accounts for only 55 percent of available supply (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2010). Besides being necessary for sustaining human life, water is used in a number of very important ways in the Philippines: agricultural irrigation, fisheries production, hydroelectric power generation, industrial production and navigation, among others. Among all these uses, agriculture (irrigation and fisheries) consumes the most water, accounting for 88 percent of total water withdrawals (Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap, 2003). Domestic water use2 accounts for eight percent while the remaining four percent is used for industrial/ commercial purposes (Figure 1).

* MCM – million cubic meters Source: JICA/NWRB (1998)

Figure 1: Surface Water Withdrawals by Sector (1995)

Water Resources: Supply and Demand

8%

It is ironic that a country with a looming water crisis like the Philippines is actually rich in water resources. The country has 421 river basins, 72 lakes and numerous streams and creeks that altogether represent 86.2 percent of the country’s total water resource potential (Table 2). In addition to its surface water, the Philippines Table 2: Water Resource Potential, by Region Region* Surface Groundwater Total Water Potential Potential (MCM) (MCM) I 3,250 1,248 4,498 II 8,510 2,825 11,335 III 7,890 1,721 9,611 IV 6,370 1,410 7,780 V 3,060 1,085 4,145 VI 14,200 1,144 15,344 VII 2,060 879 2,939 VIII 9,350 2,557 11,907 IX 12,100 1,082 13,182 X 29,000 2,116 31,116 XI 11,300 2,375 13,675 XII 18,700 1,758 20,458 TOTAL 125,790 20,200 145,990 % SHARE 86.16 13.84 100.00 * For purposes of planning, the country is divided into 12 water resource regions (WRRs) based on existing hyrdrological boundaries. The country’s 17 administrative regions should not be confused with the WRRs, which respectively cover the following areas: Ilocos Region; Cagayan Valley; Central Luzon; Southern Tagalog; Bicol; Western Visayas; Central Visayas; Eastern Visayas; Southwestern Mindanao; Northern Mindanao; Southeastern Mindanao; and Southern Mindanao. Source: Adapted from the Philippine Environment Monitor (2003)

2

4%

88%

Agriculture

Domestic

Industrial/Commercial

Source: World Resources Institute (2003)

While it may appear that there is an overabundance of water resources in the Philippines, it must be pointed out that these resources are unevenly distributed throughout the country due to the Philippines’ archipelagic nature. Water supply levels differ from province to province based on a number of important factors such as population distribution, rainfall patterns, watershed quality, and the rate of groundwater recharge. Moreover, in the Philippines, the water problem relates more to the lack of quality rather than quantity. The absence of waste management and sewage treatment facilities in most provinces and municipalities has resulted in the improper disposal of household, 1

Surface water refers to water found in lakes, rivers, and streams while groundwater refers to subsurface water found in underground aquifers. 2 There are five general components of domestic water use in the Philippines: drinking water for survival, water for hygiene, water for sanitation, water for food preparation, and water for laundry (Inocencio, 1999). It has been estimated that each Filipino needed at least 54 liters of water per day to meet his or her daily water requirements for maintaining life and promoting proper sanitation and public health.

industrial, and agricultural wastes that has greatly compromised the quality and availability of ground and surface water in the country, especially near major metropolitan areas.3 An Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) study in 2003 revealed that 66 percent of the country’s 611 classified inland bodies of water were deemed unsuitable for human consumption.4 The EMB also reported that more than half (57%) of the deep wells being monitored for groundwater extraction were highly contaminated with fecal coliforms (Philippine Environment Monitor, 2003). It has been estimated that the country produces almost 2.2 million tons of organic waste per year, with the bulk coming from domestic use, 48 percent; agriculture, 37 percent; and industrial/ commercial purposes, 15 percent (See Figure 2).5 Figure 2: Source of Water Pollution by BOD*, by Sector 15%

48%

levels penalize consumers by effectively raising the price of water due to increasing costs for water collection, treatment and distribution. High NRW losses also make it very difficult for water utilities to recover their investments and generate income that should be used to improve physical infrastructure and expand service delivery. Water scarcity has also been attributed to the massive degradation of the Philippines’ watersheds and river basins, which are integral to the replenishment and maintenance of ground and surface water. The mismanagement of the Philippines’ forest resources over the last 50 years has resulted in a cumulative loss of more than 97 percent of the country’s original forest cover. Based on the Forest Management Bureau (FMB) data, only 7.2 million hectares out of the 27 million hectares of original forested area remained in 2008 (Figure 3). The Philippines is considered to be one of the most severely deforested countries in the tropics and is among the countries with the lowest per capita forest cover in the Asia-Pacific region (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2000).

37%

Figure 3: Philippine Forested Land Area (In Million Hectares) Domestic

Agriculture

Industrial/Commercial

14 12

* BOD - biochemical oxygen demand Source: Philippine Environment Monitor (2003) Area

10

The lack of adequate water infrastructure has also resulted in a grossly inefficient distribution system characterized by pipe leaks, illegal connections, and inaccurate metering and billing systems. The Bureau of Soil and Water Management (BSWM) estimated that nonrevenue water (NRW)6 accounts for 60 percent of total groundwater extraction in the Philippines. High NRW 3

Based on the results of the 2003 National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS), only 7 percent of the country’s total population is connected to sewerage systems. It has been estimated that more than 90 percent of the sewage generated in the country is not disposed of/ treated in an environmentally acceptable manner (Philippine Environment Monitor, 2003). 4 One example is the Marilao River in Bulacan Province, considered to be one of the dirtiest rivers in the world due to high levels of chromium, cadmium, copper and arsenic coming from the various industries lined along the river. 5 Water pollution does not only limit the amount of water available for human consumption and production. It also threatens human health in the form of water-borne diseases such as typhoid, cholera, dysentery, hepatitis and diarrhea, among others. Water pollution also leads to declining fisheries production, lowering available food stocks and raising the price of fish and other marine species. Untreated wastewater discharge can also have significant impacts on local tourism. 6 NRW is defined as the difference between the volume of water put into a water distribution system and the volume that is billed to customers (World Bank, 2006).

8 6 4 2 0 Area

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

13.2

10.9

7.4

6.2

7.2

Source: Forest Management Bureau (2008)

The effects of deforestation and pollution on the country’s water supply will be magnified by the increasing threat of climate change. According to the Department of Agriculture (DA), more than half of the country’s provinces are considered vulnerable to the effects of drought and desertification (Table 3). In 2010, agricultural losses attributed to the effects of the dry spell brought about by the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) were pegged at PhP12.1 billion. Falling water levels likewise constrained the amount of water available for power generation, especially in Mindanao, which relies heavily on hydroelectric power. While exact figures are not clear yet, experts have predicted that the frequency and intensity of droughts and desertification will increase in the near future as the effects of climate change become more pronounced. 3

Table 3: Provinces/Cities Vulnerable to the Effects of Drought/Desertfication 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

Highly Vulnerable Ilocos Norte Ilocos Sur La Union Pangasinan Cagayan Isabela Aurora Bataan Bulacan Nueva Ecija Pampanga Tarlac Zambales Cavite Rizal Occidental Mindoro Palawan Capiz Iloilo Negros Occidental Misamis Oriental Zamboanga City Sarangani South Cotobato

Moderately Vulnerable 1. Abra 2. Apayao 3. Benguet 4. Ifugao 5. Mountain Province 6. Nueva Vizcaya 7. Quirino 8. Batangas 9. Laguna 10. Quezon 11. Romblon 12. Sorsogon 13. Aklan 14. Antique 15. Bohol 16. Samar 17. Zamboanga del Norte 18. Zamboanga Sibugay 19. Zamboanga del Sur 20. Bukidnon 21. Davao Oriental 22. Davao del Sur 23. Davao City

Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is the lead government agency in charge of water resource management. However, the responsibility of planning and managing the country’s water resources is shared with several government departments, bureaus and attached agencies concerned with different aspects of water resource management (Table 4). In addition, local government units (LGUs) are required to provide water supply subsystems, communal irrigation facilities, and implement social forestry and local flood control projects, subject to the supervision and control of the DENR.

Table 4: Key National Government Agencies Involved in Water Resource Management Department

Line Agency

National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR)

National Water Resources Board (NWRB)

The complexity of water governance in the Philippines can be attributed to the multiplicity of institutions involved, all with different hierarchical coverage, varied mandates and representing the interests of diverse constituencies. Such a model is described by Malayang (2004) as being multilevel, multisectoral and multithematic. Agencies and institutions overseeing the governance of a given body of water are multilevel in the sense that they often range from the local, regional, national and even global levels (in instances when a body of water is covered by international conventions). At the same time, decisions and actions affecting the water sector are multisectoral, in such that both state and nonstate sectors are involved including LGUs, industries, fisherfolk, civil society and even communities living near these bodies of water. Lastly, water governance is multithematic in the sense that it tries to address a number of concerns such as pollution control, flood control, watershed improvement and sedimentation control, among others. As part of its natural resource management function under the Philippine bureaucracy, the Department of 4

Department of Agriculture (DA)

Department of Health (DOH)

Coordinates the preparation of national/regional/sectoral development policies and investment programs. Administers/enforces the Water Code and serves as the lead coordinator for water resources management programs.

Forest Management Bureau (FMB)

Formulates/implements policies and programs for the protection, development, and management of forest lands and watershed areas.

Environmental Management Bureau (EMB)

Sets and enforces water quality and effluent standards, criteria, and guidelines for all aspects of water quality management.

National Irrigation Administration (NIA) Bureau of Soil and Water Management (BSWM)

Undertakes water resource projects for agricultural irrigation and other purposes, such as flood control and drainage, hydropower development, etc Formulates/implements policies and programs for the protection of existing and potential sources of soil and water for agricultural development

Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) Environmental Health Service (EHS)

Establishes plans for the proper protection and management of the country's fisheries and aquatics resources.

Source: Department of Agriculture (2010)

Institutional Arrangements on Water Governance

Functions

National Power Corporation (NPC)

Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS)

Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA)

Responsible for water supply and sanitation programs and strategies to forestall the spread of water-borne diseases. Develops and manages electric generation facilities including but not limited to hydroelectric dams and undertakes other activities related to watershed management. Regulates water concessionaires' rates and service standards in Metro Manila and maintains existing assets and infrastructure. Promotes/finances/regulates the construction and operation of local water utilities outside Metro Manila.

Source: Adapted from Elazegui (2004), Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap (2010)

Figure 4: Functional Chart of Water-Related Agencies in the Philippines

Policymaking NEDA Coordination / Regulatory NWRB

Water Quality & Sanitation EMB BRL

DOH EOHO

Water Supply DOF/CDA DPWH-PMO RWS MWSS LWUA/WDs DILG-PMO-WSSP LGUs DAR

Watershed Management FMB NIA

BSWM NPC

Irrigation NIA BSWM

DA DAR

Integrated Area Development LLDA BOI

RDC PEZA

Hydropower NPC NEA

DOE

Data Collection

Research

Cloud Seeding

PCARRD PCAMRD

OCD PAF BSWM

Flood Management

Ports & Navigation

Fisheries & Recreation

DPWH-PMOMFCP OCD-NDCC PAGASA

PPA

BFAR PTA

NRW MGB PAGASA BRS

NAMRIA NIA MWSS LWUA

Source: Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap (2010)

While in principle there is nothing wrong with involving a number of institutions in water resource management, the problem lies in the absence of a single institution that has the overall power and authority to manage water resources in the Philippines. Instead, there are different agencies with varying degrees of power and responsibility over water resource management (Figure 4). These powers and responsibilities are often overlapping, and in some cases, even conflicting given the multiple values and uses that water resources have for different sectors of society. An oft-cited example is the Utilities Administration (LWUA), which functions as both financing institution and regulator. As Rola, Francisco and Liguton (2004) noted, “no legal basis exists that supports the coordination and complementation of the different functions of the institutions involved.” It was also pointed out that there is an apparent lack of coordination and coherence of activities and standards among agencies involved in water quality monitoring, particularly the

Department of Health (DOH) and the DENR-EMB (Elazegui, 2004). The Philippines has an extensive body of water and water-related legislations that provide the legal bases for policies and regulations concerning water resource management in the country. These include the Water Code of 1976, Revised Forestry Code of 1975, Provincial Water Utilities Act of 1973, and the National Integrated Protected Areas System Act of 1992, among others (Annex 1). However, many of these laws are considered to be ad hoc and limited in coverage, and only constitute “a partial [and] implicit framework” that fail to integrate key areas of water resource management (Bautista and Tan, 2003). It must also be noted that many of these laws are outdated in terms of appropriate policies for water resource management and economic pricing. Finally, it must be pointed out that the biggest hindrance to effective water resource management in the Philippines is the government’s perceived lack of political will to prioritize the sustainable management 5

of the country’s water resources and effectively implement existing laws and regulations on water resource management. The Philippine government has long been described by pundits as a “soft state”7 that is prone to capture by vested interests. The poor state of the country’s water resources is proof of the government’s continued inefficiency and inability to consistently deliver on its mandate to ensure the “optimum development and rational utilization of these resources.”8 Policy Options for Improving Water Resource Management in the Philippines The threat of water scarcity is a complex problem that will involve multiple long-term solutions that cut across different sectors of society. The successful management of the country’s water resources will demand an integrated approach that takes into consideration the government’s different policies and programs on agriculture, land use planning, energy development, industrial production and population control, among others. Managing the multiple values and resource uses that water has for different sectors of society will require extensive coordination among the different agencies, institutions and user groups involved in water resource management across all administrative levels. However, coordination among different water institutions in the Philippines is cumbersome and problematic given the sheer number of agencies involved. To address this, a number of legislative proposals in the Senate in the Fifteenth Congress have called for the creation of a supraregulatory body that will take charge of regulating the resource extraction and economic pricing activities of all water utilities in the country. Senate Bill Nos. 611 and 2641 (Water Regulatory Act) resepctively authored by Senators Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada and Edgardo J. Angara seek to streamline the economic regulatory functions of the government through the creation of a Water Regulatory Commission (WRC) that will take over the current functions, powers, and responsibilities of the NWRB. Aside from its policymaking and resource regulatory functions, the

7 “Soft States” as defined by Gunnar Myrdal (1968) are states that are dominated by powerful interests that exploit the power of the State or Government to serve their own interests rather than the interests of their citizens. Policies decided on are often not enforced, if they are enacted at all, and that the authorities, even when framing policies, are reluctant to place obligations on people. 8 This is the primary objective of the Water Code of the Philippines under Presidential Decree No. 1067 which took effect in December 31, 1976.

6

scope of the proposed WRC’s functions and controls will be expanded to include the economic regulation functions currently being undertaken by the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS), LWUA, and other offices and agencies concerned with the economic regulation of water. Proponents of this legislative measure claim that the importance of water as a critical resource demands the establishment of a permanent government commission tasked to monitor and coordinate water resource management efforts in the country. However, it must be pointed out that the powers and functions of the proposed WRC will be strictly limited to policy formulation, coordination, monitoring and economic regulation. The proposed WRC will not be involved in the actual implementation of water resource management policies and programs since these powers and functions will remain with the various key national line agencies (such as DENR) whose heads will no longer be part of the proposed WRC (since the WRC will be composed of three to five commissioners to be appointed by the President). Some quarters fear that the establishment of a permanent government commission will create another level in the bureaucracy that will further complicate the leadership issue among agencies in the water sector and convolute the country’s already complex water resource management framework. Instead of establishing a permanent government commission, there is a proposal for the NWRB to be reorganized in order to reflect the sheer importance of water as a resource and to highlight the government’s primary role in ensuring safe and adequate water supplies for the population. The threat of water scarcity is a pressing national issue that affects all sectors of society and demands the attention and leadership of no less than the President. As such, it is proposed that the NWRB be reorganized and placed under the administrative supervision of the Office of the President. Furthermore, it is proposed that the new NWRB be composed of the President as chairman, the DENR Secretary as vice-chairman, and the Secretaries of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) and the DA, and the Director of the University of the Philippines-National Hydraulic Research Center (UPNHRC) as members. Placing the NWRB under the direct control and supervision of the President will clarify the leadership issue among agencies and allow the President to arbitrate and resolve the various sectoral issues and conflicts over the country’s water resources, based on the development goals and thrusts the President identified in his/her Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan.

The resource regulatory functions of the national government may also be rationalized by consolidating the powers and functions of different water sector agencies and offices. The mandate of the EMB to ensure that environmental health and safety standards are being met should be expanded to include the public health functions relating to water resource management currently being undertaken by the DOH-Environmental Health Service (DOH-EHS). The development and maintenance of small-scale irrigation facilities being undertaken by the BSWM should likewise be transferred to the National Irrigation Administration (NIA). Various studies have called for the creation and passage of an omnibus water resource management bill that will rationalize and consolidate all water-related legislations in the country. It is suggested that the Water Code of 1976 be revised to serve as a base for incorporating laws such as the Clean Water Act of 2004, National Water Crisis Act of 1995, and the Rainwater Harvesting Act of 1989, among others. Along with the proposed National Land Use Act, 9 an omnibus water resource management bill is envisaged to provide order and clarity to the government’s complicated land and water resource management framework. Senate Bill No. 933 (Water Resources Mangement Act) authored by Senator Manuel “Lito” M. Lapid seeks to adapt an integrated approach to water resources development for a more efficient and sustainable policymaking and implementation. However, the bill needs to be more comprehensive in order to rationalize and consolidate all water-related legislations in the

country which may be attained through an omnibus water resource management measure. An omnibus water resource management bill must be complemented by critical legislation such as Senate Bill No. 1367 (Final Forest Limits Act) authored by Senator Loren B. Legarda, which seeks to implement Section 4, Article XII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution which states that “Congress shall, as soon as possible, determine by law the specific limits of forest lands and national parks, marking clearly their boundaries on the ground. Thereafter, such forest lands and national parks shall be consented and may not be increased nor diminished, except by law.” The permanent delineation of forest lands will go a long way to strengthen the ecological stability of the country’s watersheds, improve the rate of groundwater recharge, and reduce the risk of flooding and landslides in environmentally-critical areas. Finally, it must be stressed that all of these laws will be for naught if they are not implemented consistently and effectively. It may be surmised that the formulation and passage of these laws have done little to stem the steady degradation of the country’s water resources. Given the importance of water as a basic requirement for human life and a vital input for socioeconomic progress, Congress must use its significant oversight functions to regularly monitor water agencies’ performance and hold them accountable for their actions (or inactions). Congress must likewise ensure that these agencies are empowered with the appropriate budget to enable them to effectively perform their duties.

9

Different versions of the proposed National Land Use Act are currently being deliberated at the Committee level in both Houses of Congress. In the Senate, there are five bills being discussed primarily by the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources: Senate Bill Nos. 109, 141, 647, 1369 and 2673, which are respectively authored by Senators Gregorio B. Honasan, Pia S. Cayetano, Jinggoy Ejercito Estrada, Loren B. Legarda, and Juan Miguel F. Zubiri.

7

References: 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. Aquastat (2011). Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome http:/ /www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/main/index.stm. Bautista, G. and Tan, R. (2003). “Watersheds and Groundwater Depletion in the Philippines: The Cagayan de Oro Experience”. Institute of Philippine Culture, Quezon City. Bureau of Soil and Water Management (2010). Department of Agriculture (2010). Elazegui, D. (2004). Water Resource Governance: Realities and Challenges in the Philippines. Philippine Institute for Development Studies, Makati City. Environmental Management Bureau (2003). Food and Agriculture Organization (2000). “Asia and the Pacific National Forestry Programmes: Update 34”. FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok. Forest Management Bureau (2009). Inocencio, A., Padilla, J. and Javier, E. (1999). “How Much Water Do Households Require?” PIDS Policy Notes. Philippine Institute for Development Studies, Makati City. Kingdom, Liemberger, and Marin (2006). “The Challenge of Reducing Non-Revenue Water (NRW) in Developing Countries How the Private Sector Can Help: A Look at PerformanceBased Service Contracting”. The World Bank, Washington D.C. Malayang III, B. (2004). “A Model of Water Governance in the Philippines”. Winning the Water War: Watersheds, Water Policies, and Water Institutions. Philippine Institute for Development Studies, Makati City.

Myrdal, G. (1968), “Asian Drama: An Inquiry into the Poverty of Nations”. Pantheon Books, New York. National Demographic and Health Survey (2003), National Statistics Office. National Statistical Coordination Board (2010). Philippine Environment Monitor: Water Quality (2003). The World Bank, New York. Philippine Millennium Development Goals Watch (2011), National Statistical Coordination Board, Makati City. National Water Resources Board (1998). Master Plan Study on Water Resources Management in the Republic of the Philippines: Final Report. Japanese International Cooperation Agency. Tokyo. Philippine Water Supply Sector Roadmap (2003, 2010). National Economic and Development Authority, Pasig City. Presidential Decree No. 1067 or The Water Code of the Philippines (1976). Rola, A., Francisco, H., and Liguton, J. (2004). “Toward a WinWin Water Management Approach in the Philippines”. Winning the Water War: Watersheds, Water Policies, and Water Institutions. Philippine Institute for Development Studies, Makati City. United Nations Development Programme (2006). “Human Development Report 2006 - Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty, and the Global Water Crisis”. United Nations Development Programme, New York. World Resources Institute-Earth Trends (2003), http:// earthtrends.wri.org.

This Policy Brief was principally prepared by Mr. Harry S. Pasimio, Jr. under the supervision of SEPO’s Directors and the overall guidance of its Director General. The views and opinions expressed are those of SEPO and do not necessarily reflect those of the Senate, of its leadership, or of its individual members. For comments and suggestions, please e-mail us at [email protected]. 8

Annex 1: Key Water-Related Legislations

STATUTE Commonwealth Act No. 383, AntiDumping Law (1938) Republic Act No. 4850, Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA) Act (1966), as amended by Presidential Decree No. 813 (1975) Republic Act No. 6234, Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) Act (1971) Presidential Decree No. 198, Provincial Water Utilities Act (1973)

Presidential Decree No. 281, Pasig River Development Council Act (1973) Presidential Decree No. 600, Marine Pollution Decree (1974), as amended by Presidential Decree No. 979 (1976) Presidential Decree No. 705, Revised Forestry Code (1975)

Presidential Decree No. 856, Sanitation Code (1975)

Presidential Decree No. 984, National Pollution Control Decree (1976)

Presidential Decree No. 1067, Water Code (1976) Presidential Decree No. 1096, National Building Code (1977) Presidential Decree No. 1151, Environmental Policy Decree (1977) Presidential Decree No. 1152, Environment Code (1977)

Presidential Decree No. 1586, Environmental Impact Statement System Decree (1978)

PURPOSE/MANDATE Prohibits dumping of refuse, waste  matter or other substances into rivers  Regulates and controls the pollution of  the Laguna de Bay Region, including  sewage works and industrial waste  disposal systems  Constructs, operates and maintains  water systems, sewerage and  sanitation facilities in the Metro  Manila area   Authorizes the creation of water  districts to operate and administer  water supply and wastewater disposal  systems in the provincial areas  Regulates and controls the pollution of  the Pasig River 

STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION Not fully enforced    Strictly enforcing but not to domestic  wastewater 

Limited sewerage and sanitation  service coverage 

Operation and management of  wastewater disposal system not  implemented  Not fully enforced 

Regulates and controls the pollution of  Coverage is not efficiently monitored  seas  due to limited resources  Provides criteria, guidelines and  methods for the proper and accurate  classification and survey of all lands of  the public domain  Requires cities and municipalities to  provide an adequate and efficient  system for sewage collection,  transport and disposal in their areas of  jurisdiction  Provides guidelines for the control of  water pollution from industrial sources  and sets penalties for violations;  requires all polluters to secure permits  Consolidates legislations relating to  ownership, development, exploitation  and conservation of water resources  Requires connection of new buildings  to a water‐borne sewerage system  Recognizes the right of the people to a  healthy environment  Provides guidelines to protect and  improve the quality of water resources  and defines responsibilities for  surveillance and mitigation of pollution  incidents  Mandates the conduct of  environmental impact assessment  studies for all investments undertaken  by the government and private sector 

Not fully enforced 

Not enforced and monitored, e.g.,  connection to sewer system by houses  in areas where sewerage system is  available   Not strictly enforced; compliance on  the provision of sanitation and  sewerage are not met  Not fully enforced 

Wastewater or sewage disposal are  not fully enforced  Not strictly enforced especially on  sanitation and sewerage provisions  Only enforced on big polluters (i.e.,  industries) 

Project review is not strict on  sanitation and sewerage provisions  

  9

STATUTE Republic Act No. 6716, Rainwater Harvesting Act (1989) Republic Act No. 7160, Local Government Code (1991)

Republic Act No. 7586, National Integrated Protected Areas System Act (1992) Republic Act No. 8041, National Water Crisis Act (1995)

Republic Act No. 8371, Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (1997)

Republic Act No. 9003, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act (2000)

Republic Act No. 9147, Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act (2001) Republic Act No. 9275, Clean Water Act (2004)

Republic Act No. 9729, Climate Change Act (2009)

PURPOSE/MANDATE  Mandates the construction of water  wells and rainwater collectors in all  barangays  Devolves enforcement of laws on  sanitation to local government units  (LGUs) and the provision of basic  services such as water supply,  sanitation and flood control  Calls for the protection of outstanding,  remarkable areas and biologically  important public lands, bio‐geographic  zones, and related ecosystems  Provides urgent and effective  measures to address the nationwide  water crisis relating to issues on water  supply, distribution, finance,  privatization of state‐run water  facilities, the protection and  conservation of watersheds and the  waste and pilferage of water, including  the serious matter of graft and  corruption in all the water agencies  Protects the rights of indigenous  peoples to own and participate in the  planning for and management of  natural resources found within their  ancestral domain  Provides the legal framework for a  national program that will manage the  control, transfer, transport, processing  and disposal of solid waste in the  country  Mandates to conserve and protect  wildlife species and their habitats in  order to promote ecological balance  and enhance biological biodiversity  Provides for a comprehensive and  integrated strategy to prevent and  minimize water pollution from land‐ based sources  Institutionalizes  the government’s climate change  response mechanisms  and harmonizes existing policies and  programs 

Source: Adapted from the Philippine Environment Monitor (2003)  

10

STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION  Not enforced and monitored 

Not strictly enforced due to budgetary  constraints and low priority for  sanitation and sewerage projects 

Not strictly enforced due to budgetary  constraints and lack of manpower 

Was implemented during that period  and resulted in the reorganization of  the MWSS and LWUA 

Not strictly enforced due to budgetary  constraints and lack of manpower 

Not strictly enforced  

Not fully enforced due to budgetary  constraints and lack of manpower 

Not strictly enforced; compliance on  the provision of sanitation and  sewerage facilities have not been met  Not yet fully carried out and  implemented due to budgetary  constraints